Geology topics

David J. Wald

Publications and source records attributed to David J. Wald.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

USGS2018

Spatial and spectral interpolation of ground-motion intensity measure observations

Following a significant earthquake, ground‐motion observations are available for a limited set of locations and intensity measures (IMs). Typically, however, it is desirable to know the ground motions for additional IMs and at locations where observations are unavailable. Various interpolation methods are available, but because IMs or their logarithms are normally distributed, spatially correlated, and correlated with each other at a given location, it is possible to apply the conditional multivariate normal (MVN) distribution to the problem of estimating unobserved IMs. In this article, we review the MVN and its application to general estimation problems, and then apply the MVN to the specific problem of ground‐motion IM interpolation. In particular, we present (1) a formulation of the MVN for the simultaneous interpolation of IMs across space and IM type (most commonly, spectral response at different oscillator periods) and (2) the inclusion of uncertain observation data in the MVN formulation. These techniques, in combination with modern empirical ground‐motion models and correlation functions, provide a flexible framework for estimating a variety of IMs at arbitrary locations.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2018

Increasing earthquake insurance coverage in California via parametric hedges

California has the highest earthquake risk of any state in the United States. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) reported in 2017 that 73% of the nation’s annual losses to earthquakes were expected to be concentrated in California and the Pacific Northwest. California alone constitutes 61% ($3.7 billion out of an estimated $6.1 billion annual losses nationwide). Despite this overwhelming accumulation of risk, recent estimates of earthquake insurance coverage rates in California range from 10% to 13%. Few small businesses have coverage. Throughout the last 20 years, a variety of financial mechanisms have been developed in the industry as viable alternatives to traditional earthquake indemnity insurance. We explore how parametric hedges, a type of financial derivative used in the reinsurance industry, can be extended to the local California market in order to provide an influx of cash quickly and transparently after an earthquake event. Examples of how these solutions can be tailored to needs ranging from the individual homeowner, to businesses, and to public entities are presented.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2018

State transportation agencies partner to deploy and enhance ShakeCast

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is organizing and leading a three-year Transportation Pooled Fund (TPF) project, Connecting the Dots: Implementing ShakeCast Across Multiple State Departments of Transportation for Rapid Post-Earthquake Response. Ten state Departments of Transportation (DOT)—CA, ID, MO, MS, OK, OR, SC, TX, UT, AND WA—have partnered and combined research funds to pursue implementation and advancement of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) ShakeCast system. ShakeCast is a software application that automatically retrieves ShakeMap shaking estimates and performs analyses using fragility functions for bridges, buildings, and other structures. The ShakeCast system identifies which facilities are most likely impacted by an earthquake and sends notifications to responders in the minutes after an earthquake. By focusing inspection efforts on the most damage-susceptible facilities in the severely shaken areas, ShakeCast can reduce response time and priorities for bridge inspections in the aftermath of a significant earthquake. The goal of the TPF project is to establish or enhance operational ShakeCast instances for all the partner DOTs, while advancing transportation-focused aspects of the software platform. DOTs are uniquely able to take advantage of the ShakeCast technology in that bridge fragilities can be readily derived from the National Bridge Inventory (NBI). DOTs also share the need for prioritized response strategies given their very large numbers of facilities—over wide areas—that have varying vulnerabilities, many of which could potentially be affected by earthquake shaking. The ten-state TPF project will also explore opportunities for DOT-specific ShakeCast software modifications, for example, for enhanced neighboring-state situational awareness and response coordination as well as for long-term maintenance and operations of their ShakeCast systems.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2018

Development of a domestic earthquake alert protocol combining the USGS pager and FEMA Hazus systems

The U.S. Geological Survey’s PAGER automated alert system provides rapid (10-20 min) loss estimates in terms of ranges of fatalities and economic impact for all significant earthquakes around the globe. In contrast, FEMA’s Hazus software, which is currently operated manually by FEMA personnel internally within several hours of any large domestic earthquake, provides more detailed loss information quantified in terms of physical damage to the building stock, as well as a broad range of social and economic consequences estimated at a much higher spatial resolution (census-tract level). Hazus was originally designed for FEMA’s mitigation planning, but has been used of late for post-earthquake situational awareness. While the quick alerts generated automatically by the PAGER system are a suitable way to initially identify consequences for earthquakes, there remains a need to provide detailed loss information for facilitating a wider array of post-earthquake decisions among emergency managers. As such, we have developed a prototype summary product that takes advantage of the benefits of both these loss models for significant domestic earthquakes. The signature product, a new twoPAGER report, will serve as a supplement to the widely deployed standard onePAGER product for all significant domestic earthquakes. Page one is the standard, automated PAGER alert content, with summary alert levels for overall fatality and economic loss estimates, as well as summary content on recent earthquakes, structure vulnerability, and historical secondary hazards. As soon as the Hazus run using the most up-to-date version of the USGS ShakeMap is completed and reviewed by both agencies, the second alert page will be generated and delivered via the USGS website as an update. This second page will contain a summary of the more comprehensive Hazus model results, including spatially distributed estimates of: affected population, economic impact, non-fatal injuries, displaced households, and damage to structures (including potential building safety evaluation requirements). This enhancement does not affect the timeliness and the importance of the initial (onePAGER) alerting content for significant earthquakes; however, the twoPAGER report will provide more detailed, damage and loss/impact content for the Nation in the critical hours following a damaging earthquake.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2017

An open repository of earthquake-triggered ground-failure inventories

Earthquake-triggered ground failure, such as landsliding and liquefaction, can contribute significantly to losses, but our current ability to accurately include them in earthquake-hazard analyses is limited. The development of robust and widely applicable models requires access to numerous inventories of ground failures triggered by earthquakes that span a broad range of terrains, shaking characteristics, and climates. We present an openly accessible, centralized earthquake-triggered groundfailure inventory repository in the form of a ScienceBase Community to provide open access to these data with the goal of accelerating research progress. The ScienceBase Community hosts digital inventories created by both U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and non-USGS authors. We present the original digital inventory files (when available) as well as an integrated database with uniform attributes. We also summarize the mapping methodology and level of completeness as reported by the original author(s) for each inventory. This document describes the steps taken to collect, process, and compile the inventories and the process for adding additional ground-failure inventories to the ScienceBase Community in the future.

Data Series↗

USGS2017

Grand challenges for integrated USGS science — A workshop report

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a long history of advancing the traditional Earth science disciplines and identifying opportunities to integrate USGS science across disciplines to address complex societal problems. The USGS science strategy for 2007–2017 laid out key challenges in disciplinary and interdisciplinary arenas, culminating in a call for increased focus on a number of crosscutting science directions. Ten years on, to further the goal of integrated science and at the request of the Executive Leadership Team (ELT), a workshop with three dozen invited scientists spanning different disciplines and career stages in the Bureau convened on February 7–10, 2017, at the USGS John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis in Fort Collins, Colorado. The workshop focused on identifying “grand challenges” for integrated USGS science. Individual participants identified nearly 70 potential grand challenges before the workshop and through workshop discussions. After discussion, four overarching grand challenges emerged: Natural resource security, Societal risk from existing and emerging threats, Smart infrastructure development, and Anticipatory science for changing landscapes. Participants also identified a “comprehensive science challenge” that highlights the development of integrative science, data, models, and tools—all interacting in a modular framework—that can be used to address these and other future grand challenges: Earth Monitoring, Analyses, and Projections (EarthMAP) EarthMAP is our long-term vision for an integrated scientific framework that spans traditional scientific boundaries and disciplines, and integrates the full portfolio of USGS science: research, monitoring, assessment, analysis, and information delivery. The Department of Interior, and the Nation in general, have a vast array of information needs. The USGS meets these needs by having a broadly trained and agile scientific workforce. Encouraging and supporting cross-discipline engagement would position the USGS to tackle complex and multifaceted scientific and societal challenges in the 21st Century.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2017

Computing spatial correlation of ground motion intensities for ShakeMap

Modeling the spatial correlation of ground motion residuals, caused by coherent contributions from source, path, and site, can provide valuable loss and hazard information, as well as a more realistic depiction of ground motion intensities. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) software package, ShakeMap, utilizes a deterministic empirical approach to estimate median ground shaking in conjunction with observed seismic data. ShakeMap-based shaking estimates are used in concert with loss estimation algorithms to estimate fatalities and economic losses after significant seismic events around the globe. Incorporating the spatial correlation of ground motion residuals has been shown to improve seismic loss estimates. In particular, Park, Bazzuro, and Baker (Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, 2007) investigated computing spatially correlated random fields of residuals. However, for large scale ShakeMap grids, computational requirements of the method are prohibitive. In this work, a memory efficient algorithm is developed to compute the random fields and implemented using the ShakeMap framework. This new, iterative parallel algorithm is based on decay properties of an associated ground motion correlation function and is shown to significantly reduce computational requirements associated with adding spatial variability to the ShakeMap g round motion estimates. Further, we demonstrate and quantify the impact of adding peak ground motion spatial variability on resulting earthquake loss estimates.

Computers & Geosciences↗

USGS2017

Using structural damage statistics to derive macroseismic intensity within the Kathmandu valley for the 2015 M7.8 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake

We make and analyze structural damage observations from within the Kathmandu valley following the 2015 M7.8 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake to derive macroseismic intensities at several locations including some located near ground motion recording sites. The macroseismic intensity estimates supplement the limited strong ground motion data in order to characterize the damage statistics. This augmentation allows for direct comparisons between ground motion amplitudes and structural damage characteristics and ultimately produces a more constrained ground shaking hazard map for the Gorkha earthquake. For systematic assessments, we focused on damage to three specific building categories: (a) low/mid-rise reinforced concrete frames with infill brick walls, (b) unreinforced brick masonry bearing walls with reinforced concrete slabs, and (c) unreinforced brick masonry bearing walls with partial timber framing. Evaluating dozens of photos of each construction type, assigning each building in the study sample to a European Macroseismic Scale (EMS)-98 Vulnerability Class based upon its structural characteristics, and then individually assigning an EMS-98 Damage Grade to each building allows a statistically derived estimate of macroseismic intensity for each of nine study areas in and around the Kathmandu valley. This analysis concludes that EMS-98 macroseismic intensities for the study areas from the Gorkha mainshock typically were in the VII–IX range. The intensity assignment process described is more rigorous than the informal approach of assigning intensities based upon anecdotal media or first-person accounts of felt-reports, shaking, and their interpretation of damage. Detailed EMS-98 macroseismic assessments in urban areas are critical for quantifying relations between shaking and damage as well as for calibrating loss estimates. We show that the macroseismic assignments made herein result in fatality estimates consistent with the overall and district-wide reported values.

Kathmandu Valley↗

USGS2017

Development and utilization of USGS ShakeCast for rapid post-earthquake assessment of critical facilities and infrastructure

The ShakeCast system is an openly available, near real-time post-earthquake information management system. ShakeCast is widely used by public and private emergency planners and responders, lifeline utility operators and transportation engineers to automatically receive and process ShakeMap products for situational awareness, inspection priority, or damage assessment of their own infrastructure or building portfolios. The success of ShakeCast to date and its broad, critical-user base mandates improved software usability and functionality, including improved engineering-based damage and loss functions. In order to make the software more accessible to novice users—while still utilizing advanced users’ technical and engineering background—we have developed a “ShakeCast Workbook”, a well documented, Excel spreadsheet-based user interface that allows users to input notification and inventory data and export XML files requisite for operating the ShakeCast system. Users will be able to select structure based on a minimum set of user-specified facility (building location, size, height, use, construction age, etc.). “Expert” users will be able to import user-modified structural response properties into facility inventory associated with the HAZUS Advanced Engineering Building Modules (AEBM). The goal of the ShakeCast system is to provide simplified real-time potential impact and inspection metrics (i.e., green, yellow, orange and red priority ratings) to allow users to institute customized earthquake response protocols. Previously, fragilities were approximated using individual ShakeMap intensity measures (IMs, specifically PGA and 0.3 and 1s spectral accelerations) for each facility but we are now performing capacity-spectrum damage state calculations using a more robust characterization of spectral deamnd.We are also developing methods for the direct import of ShakeMap’s multi-period spectra in lieu of the assumed three-domain design spectrum (at 0.3s for constant acceleration; 1s or 3s for constant velocity and constant displacement at very long response periods). As part of ongoing ShakeCast research and development, we will also explore the use of ShakeMap IM uncertainty estimates and evaluate the assumption of employing multiple response spectral damping values rather than the single 5%-damped value currently employed. Developing and incorporating advanced fragility assignments into the ShakeCast Workbook requires related software modifications and database improvements; these enhancements are part of an extensive rewrite of the ShakeCast application.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2017

Integrating landslide and liquefaction hazard and loss estimates with existing USGS real-time earthquake information products

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has made significant progress toward the rapid estimation of shaking and shakingrelated losses through their Did You Feel It? (DYFI), ShakeMap, ShakeCast, and PAGER products. However, quantitative estimates of the extent and severity of secondary hazards (e.g., landsliding, liquefaction) are not currently included in scenarios and real-time post-earthquake products despite their significant contributions to hazard and losses for many events worldwide. We are currently running parallel global statistical models for landslides and liquefaction developed with our collaborators in testing mode, but much work remains in order to operationalize these systems. We are expanding our efforts in this area by not only improving the existing statistical models, but also by (1) exploring more sophisticated, physics-based models where feasible; (2) incorporating uncertainties; and (3) identifying and undertaking research and product development to provide useful landslide and liquefaction estimates and their uncertainties. Although our existing models use standard predictor variables that are accessible globally or regionally, including peak ground motions, topographic slope, and distance to water bodies, we continue to explore readily available proxies for rock and soil strength as well as other susceptibility terms. This work is based on the foundation of an expanding, openly available, case-history database we are compiling along with historical ShakeMaps for each event. The expected outcome of our efforts is a robust set of real-time secondary hazards products that meet the needs of a wide variety of earthquake information users. We describe the available datasets and models, developments currently underway, and anticipated products.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2016

USGS approach to real-time estimation of earthquake-triggered ground failure - Results of 2015 workshop

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake Hazards and Landslide Hazards Programs are developing plans to add quantitative hazard assessments of earthquake-triggered landsliding and liquefaction to existing real-time earthquake products (ShakeMap, ShakeCast, PAGER) using open and readily available methodologies and products. To date, prototype global statistical models have been developed and are being refined, improved, and tested. These models are a good foundation, but much work remains to achieve robust and defensible models that meet the needs of end users. In order to establish an implementation plan and identify research priorities, the USGS convened a workshop in Golden, Colorado, in October 2015. This document summarizes current (as of early 2016) capabilities, research and operational priorities, and plans for further studies that were established at this workshop. Specific priorities established during the meeting include (1) developing a suite of alternative models; (2) making use of higher resolution and higher quality data where possible; (3) incorporating newer global and regional datasets and inventories; (4) reducing barriers to accessing inventory datasets; (5) developing methods for using inconsistent or incomplete datasets in aggregate; (6) developing standardized model testing and evaluation methods; (7) improving ShakeMap shaking estimates, particularly as relevant to ground failure, such as including topographic amplification and accounting for spatial variability; and (8) developing vulnerability functions for loss estimates.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2016

Get your science used—Six guidelines to improve your products

Introduction Natural scientists, like many other experts, face challenges when communicating to people outside their fields of expertise. This is especially true when they try to communicate to those whose background, knowledge, and experience are far distant from that field of expertise. At a recent workshop, experts in risk communication offered insights into the communication challenges of probabilistic hazard products, suggested tips, and shared their strategies for making products that a targeted audience can understand and use. Although the workshop was held to broaden the understanding and use of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Maps (NSHM), the workshop outcomes presented in this report can benefit anyone who develops products based on technical information. On the basis of research and practice into how people think, use tools, make decisions, and understand scientific/technical information, the social and behavioral scientists, marketers, and social-impact designers at the NSHM workshop provided remarkably consistent guidelines to develop successful science products, such as text, maps, and other products. In this report the guidelines are numbered for clarity, but they can be applied repeatedly, piecemeal, or out of order to fit each project and your resources.

Circular↗

USGS2016

Uncertainty in V s30 -based site response

Methods that account for site response range in complexity from simple linear categorical adjustment factors to sophisticated nonlinear constitutive models. Seismic‐hazard analysis usually relies on ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs); within this framework site response is modeled statistically with simplified site parameters that include the time‐averaged shear‐wave velocity to 30 m ( V S 30 ) and basin depth parameters. Because V S 30 is not known in most locations, it must be interpolated or inferred through secondary information such as geology or topography. In this article, we analyze a subset of stations for which V S 30 has been measured to address effects of V S 30 proxies on the uncertainty in the ground motions as modeled by GMPEs. The stations we analyze also include multiple recordings, which allow us to compute the repeatable site effects (or empirical amplification factors [EAFs]) from the ground motions. Although all methods exhibit similar bias, the proxy methods only reduce the ground‐motion standard deviations at long periods when compared to GMPEs without a site term, whereas measured V S 30 values reduce the standard deviations at all periods. The standard deviation of the ground motions are much lower when the EAFs are used, indicating that future refinements of the site term in GMPEs have the potential to substantially reduce the overall uncertainty in the prediction of ground motions by GMPEs.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2016

Compilation of V S 30 Data for the United States

V S 30 , the time-averaged shear-wave velocity ( V S ) to a depth of 30 meters, is a key index adopted by the earthquake engineering community to account for seismic site conditions. V S 30 is typically based on geophysical measurements of V S derived from invasive and noninvasive techniques at sites of interest. Owing to cost considerations, as well as logistical and environmental concerns, V S 30 data are sparse or not readily available for most areas. Where data are available, V S 30 values are often assembled in assorted formats that are accessible from disparate and (or) impermanent Web sites. To help remedy this situation, we compiled V S 30 measurements obtained by studies funded by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and other governmental agencies. Thus far, we have compiled V S 30 values for 2,997 sites in the United States, along with metadata for each measurement from government-sponsored reports, Web sites, and scientific and engineering journals. Most of the data in our V S 30 compilation originated from publications directly reporting the work of field investigators. A small subset (less than 20 percent) of V S 30 values was previously compiled by the USGS and other research institutions. Whenever possible, V S 30 originating from these earlier compilations were crosschecked against published reports. Both downhole and surface-based V S 30 estimates are represented in our V S 30 compilation. Most of the V S 30 data are for sites in the western contiguous United States (2,141 sites), whereas 786 V S 30 values are for sites in the Central and Eastern United States; 70 values are for sites in other parts of the United States, including Alaska (15 sites), Hawaii (30 sites), and Puerto Rico (25 sites). An interactive map is hosted on the primary USGS Web site for accessing V S 30 data ( https://earthquake.usgs.gov/data/vs30/us/ ).

Data Series↗

USGS2016

Money matters: Rapid post-earthquake financial decision-making

Post-earthquake financial decision-making is a realm beyond that of many people. In the immediate aftermath of a damaging earthquake, billions of dollars of relief, recovery, and insurance funds are in the balance through new financial instruments that allow those with resources to hedge against disasters and those at risk to limit their earthquake losses and receive funds for response and recovery.

Natural Hazards Observer↗

USGS2015

Rapid characterization of the 2015 M w 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake sequence and its seismotectonic context

Earthquake response and related information products are important for placing recent seismic events into context and particularly for understanding the impact earthquakes can have on the regional community and its infrastructure. These tools are even more useful if they are available quickly, ahead of detailed information from the areas affected by such earthquakes. Here we provide an overview of the response activities and related information products generated and provided by the U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center in association with the 2015 M 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake. This group monitors global earthquakes 24  hrs/day and 7  days/week to provide rapid information on the location and size of recent events and to characterize the source properties, tectonic setting, and potential fatalities and economic losses associated with significant earthquakes. We present the timeline over which these products became available, discuss what they tell us about the seismotectonics of the Gorkha earthquake and its aftershocks, and examine how their information is used today, and might be used in the future, to help mitigate the impact of such natural disasters.

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS2015

The Mw6.0 24 August 2014 South Napa earthquake

The M w 6.0 South Napa earthquake, which occurred at 10:20 UTC 24 August 2014 was the largest earthquake to strike the greater San Francisco Bay area since the M w 6.9 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The rupture from this right‐lateral earthquake propagated mostly unilaterally to the north and up‐dip, directing the strongest shaking toward the city of Napa, where peak ground accelerations (PGAs) between 45% g and 61% g were recorded and modified Mercalli intensities (MMIs) of VII–VIII were reported. Tectonic surface rupture with dextral slip of up to 46 cm was observed on a 12.5 km long segment, some of which was along a previously mapped strand of the West Napa fault system, although the rupture extended to the north of the mapped Quaternary strand. Modeling of seismic and geodetic data suggests an average coseismic slip of 50 cm, with a maximum slip of about 1 m at depths of 10–11 km. We observed up to 35 cm of afterslip along the surface trace in the week following the mainshock, primarily along the southern half of the surface rupture that experienced relatively little coseismic offset. Relocation of the sparse aftershock sequence suggests en echelon southwest‐ and northeast‐dipping fault planes, reflective of the complex fault geometry in this region. The Napa basin and historic and late Holocene alluvial flood deposits in downtown Napa amplified the ground motions there. Few ground failures were mapped, reflecting the dry season (as well as a persistent drought that had lowered the groundwater table) and the short duration of strong shaking in the epicentral area.

California↗

USGS2014

A V S30 map for California with geologic and topographic constraints

For many earthquake engineering applications, site response is estimated through empirical correlations with the time‐averaged shear‐wave velocity to 30 m depth ( V S 30 ). These applications therefore depend on the availability of either site‐specific V S 30 measurements or V S 30 maps at local, regional, and global scales. Because V S 30 measurements are sparse, a proxy frequently is needed to estimate V S 30 at unsampled locations. We present a new V S 30 map for California, which accounts for observational constraints from multiple sources and spatial scales, such as geology, topography, and site‐specific V S 30 measurements. We apply the geostatistical approach of regression kriging (RK) to combine these constraints for predicting V S 30 . For the V S 30 trend, we start with geology‐based V S 30 values and identify two distinct trends between topographic gradient and the residuals from the geology V S 30 model. One trend applies to deep and fine Quaternary alluvium, whereas the second trend is slightly stronger and applies to Pleistocene sedimentary units. The RK framework ensures that the resulting map of California is locally refined to reflect the rapidly expanding database of V S 30 measurements throughout California. We compare the accuracy of the new mapping method to a previously developed map of V S 30 for California. We also illustrate the sensitivity of ground motions to the new V S 30 map by comparing real and scenario ShakeMaps with V S 30 values from our new map to those for existing V S 30 maps.

California↗